| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I wanted this while debugging something.
The ad-hoc impl Debug with f.debug_struct is getting repetitive
and I've already perpetrated one copy-paste mistake.
We should consider using something like the `educe` crate's Clone.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Also fix some commonwealth spellings that had slipped in.
|
| |\ |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This is based on @eta's patches for !118 and !119: Since we already
have an unbounded channel, we don't need to use an elaborate mess of
one-shot senders. We can just use the unbounded_send() method,
which also lets us enqueue a message without having to await.
Closes #219.
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We define "coming back online" as happening when a guard attempt
succeeds, if that attempt that was launched when we seemed to be
offline.
We define "seeming to be offline" as having all of our primary
guards marked unreachable, and having received no incoming network
traffic in a while.
Closes #216.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Instead of putting a fully qualified name in the text, in most cases
we should just use the short name of the type or function we're
referring to.
In other words, instead of saying [`crate::module::Foo`], we should
typically say [`Foo`](crate::module::Foo).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We must not apply our new path-bias behavior (where we blame a guard
if it gives us too many indeterminate circuit failures) if the path
was not chosen at random. If too many random paths fail, we know
that's suspicious, since the other relays are a random sample. But
if a bunch of user-provided paths fail, that could simply be because
the user's chosen exit is down.
|
| |
|
|
| |
(One represents code that I forgot to write.)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The previous code would report all failures to build a circuit as
failures of the guard. But of course that's not right: If we
fail to extend to the second or third hop, that might or might not
be the guard's fault.
Now we use the "pending status" feature of the GuardMonitor type so
that an early failure is attributed to the guard, but a later
failure is attributed as "Indeterminate". Only a complete circuit
is called a success. We use a new "GuardStatusHandle" type here so
that we can report the status early if there is a timeout.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
By the time I merge this, most of the comments should have tickets
to go with them.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Also, refactor our message handling to be more like the tor_proto
reactors. The previous code had a bug where, once the stream of
events was exhausted, we wouldn't actually get any more
notifications.
|
|
|
There are some missing parts here (like persistence and tests)
and some incorrect parts (I am 90% sure that the "exploratory
circuit" flag is bogus). Also it is not integrated with the circuit
manager code.
|
